The article describes the retreat of the state from public infrastructures in advanced industrial countries and tests the power of theoretical approaches to explain this reform process. The authors’ data show changes in state ownership in formerly public monopoly enterprises in telecommunications, electricity, and aviation sectors of 26 countries between 1970 and 2000. Combining various analytical techniques, the authors use partial-order scalogram analysis to visualize the similarity of institutional structures and country-specific development trajectories. By pooled time-series regression they show that only the liberalization of capital markets has a significant effect on infrastructure privatization. The effects of party ideology, veto players, or corporatist interest group systems are rather insignificant over the whole period. However, by an innovative use of yearly ordinary least squares regressions, they show that governmental ideology holds great predictive power for privatization in the 1980s but not for the 1990s, when almost all countries had privatized.
Armingeon, K., Beyeler, M., & Menegale, S. (2002). Comparative political data set 1960-2002. Berne, Switzerland: University of Berne, Institute of Political Science.
2.
Beck, N. (2001). Time-series cross-sectional data: What have we learned in the past few years?Annual Review of Political Science, 4, 271-293.
3.
Beck, N., & Katz, J. (1995). What to do (and not to do) with time-series cross-section data. American Political Science Review, 89, 634-647.
4.
Berger, S., & Dore, R. (Eds.). (1996). National diversity and global capitalism. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
5.
Borg, I., & Shye, S. (1995). Facet theory: Form and content. London: Sage.
6.
Boyer, R. (1996). States against markets: The limits of globalization. New York: Routledge.
7.
Cusack, T. R. (1997). Partisan politics and public finance: Changes in public spending in the industrialized democracies, 1955-1989. Public Choice, 91(4), 375-395.
8.
Esping-Andersen, G., & Korpi, W. (1984). Social policy as class politics in post war capitalism: Scandinavia, Austria, Germany. In J. H. Goldthorpe (Ed.), Order and conflict in contemporary capitalism (pp. 179-208). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
9.
Garrett, G. (1998). Partisan politics in the global economy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
10.
Garret, G., & Lange, P. (1995). Internationalization, institutions and political change. International Organization, 49(4), 627-655.
11.
Guttman, R., & Greenbaum, C. W. (1998). Facet theory: Its development and current status. European Psychologist, 3(1), 13-36.
12.
Hall, P. A., & Soskice, D. W. (Eds.). (2001). Varieties of capitalism. The institutional foundations of comparative advantage. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
13.
Henisz, W. (2000). POLCON database. Retrieved from http://www-management.wharton.upenn.edu/henisz/POLCON/ContactInfo.html
14.
Hibbs, D. A., Jr. (1978). On the political economy of long-run trends in strike activity. British Journal of Political Science, 8, 153-175.
15.
Hibbs, D. A., Jr. (1992). Partisan theory after fifteen years. European Journal of Political Economy, 8, 361-373.
16.
Hicks, A., & Swank, D. (1992). Politics, institutions, and welfare spending in industrialized democracies, 1960-82. American Political Science Review, 86, 658-674.
17.
Ingebritsen, C. (1998). The Nordic states and European unity. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
18.
Kittel, B. (1999). Sense and sensitivity in pooled analysis of political data. European Journal of Political Research, 35(2), 225-253.
19.
Korpi, W. (1985). Power resources approach vs. action and conflict: On causal and intentional explanations in the study of power. Sociological Theory, 3, 31-45.
20.
Kunkel, C., & Pontusson, J. (1998). Corporatism versus social democracy: Divergent fortunes of the Austrian and Swedish labor movements. West European Politics, 21(2), 1-31.
21.
Lehmbruch, G. (1984). Concertation and the structure of corporatist networks. In J. H. Goldthorpe (Ed.), Order and conflict in contemporary capitalism (pp. 60-80). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
22.
Levy, S. (1998). A typology of partial-order: The case of drug use in Israel. Quality & Quantity, 32, 1-14.
23.
Lijphart, A. (1999). Patterns of democracy. Government forms and performance in thirty-six countries. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
24.
Maddala, G. S. (1997). Recent developments in dynamics econometric modelling. Retrieved from http://web.polmeth.ufl.edu/working97.brief.html
25.
Milner, H. V., & Keohane, R. O. (1996). Internationalization and domestic politics: An introduction. In R. O. Keohane & H. V. Milner, (Eds.), Internationalization and domestic politics (pp. 3-24). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
26.
Ohmae, K. (1995). The end of the nation state: The rise of regional economics. How engines of prosperity are reshaping global markets. London: HarperCollins.
27.
Olson, M., Jr. (1982). The rise and decline of nations: Economic growth, stagflation, and social rigidities. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
28.
Quinn, D. (1997). The correlates of change in international financial regulation. American Political Science Review, 91(3), 531-551.
29.
Rodrik, D. (1998). Why do more open economies have bigger governments?Journal of Political Economy, 106(5), 997-1032.
30.
Scharpf, F. W. (1991). Crisis and choice in European social democracy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
31.
Scharpf, F. W. (1997). Games real actors play. Actor-centered institutionalism in policy research. Boulder, CO: Westview.
32.
Schmidt, M. G. (2002). The impact of political parties, constitutional structures and veto players on public policy. In H. Keman (Ed.), Comparative democratic politics (pp. 166-184). London: Sage.
33.
Schmitter, P. C. (1981). Interest intermediation and regime governability in contemporary Western Europe and North America. In S. Berger (Ed.), Organizing interests in Western Europe. Pluralism, corporatism and the transformation of politics (pp. 285-327). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
34.
Schneider, V., & Tenbücken, M. (Eds.). (2004). Der Staat auf dem Rückzug: Die Privatisierung öffentlicher Infrastrukturen. Frankfurt/Main, Germany: Campus.
35.
Schneider, V. (2001). Institutional reform in telecommunications: The European Union in transnational policy diffusion. In M. Green-Cowles, J. Caporaso, & T. Risse (Eds.), Transforming Europe: Europeanization and domestic change (pp. 60-78). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
36.
Schwartz, H. (2001). Round up the usual suspects! In P. Pierson (Ed.), The new politics of the welfare state (pp. 17-44). New York: Oxford University Press.
37.
Strange, S. (1996). The retreat of the state: The diffusion of power in the world economy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
38.
Swank, D. (2002). Global capital, political institutions, and policy change in developed welfare states. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
39.
Tenbücken, M., & Schneider, V. (2004). Divergent convergence: Structures and functions of national regulatory authorities in the telecommunications sector. In J. Jordana & D. Levi-Faur (Eds.), The politics of regulation: Institutions and regulatory reforms for the age of governance (pp. 245-272). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
40.
Therborn, G. (1987). Does corporatism really matter? The economic crisis and issues of political theory. Journal of Public Policy, 7, 259-284.
41.
Tollison, R. D. (1997). Rent seeking. In D. Müller (Ed.), Perspectives on public choice: A handbook (pp. 506-525). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
42.
Tsebelis, G. (1995). Decision making in political systems: Veto players in presidentialism, parliamentarism, multicameralism, and multipartyism. British Journal of Political Science, 25(3), 289-325.
43.
Tsebelis, G. (2002a). Veto players: How political institutions work. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
44.
Tsebelis, G. (2002b). Vetoplayer data. Retrieved from http://www.polisci.ucla.edu/tsebelis/vpdata.html
45.
World Bank. (2001). World development indicators 2001. Washington, DC: Author.
